Click through the gallery above to see the latest roundup of cities and counties with bans and moratoriums on marijuana businesses and those that put zoning rules in place allowing some marijuana grows, processing and retail.

The Center for the Study of Cannabis and Social Policy, located in Seattle, Washington, recognizes that policymakers and the public will be watching our experiment not only to see how it plays out, but to learn lessons from which to inform future legalization initiatives and Legal Cannabis landscapes.

We intend to produce new research from which lessons about Cannabis Legalization can be learned, that are about the place of Cannabis in Society, as well as the place of Social values in emerging Legal Cannabis Landscapes.

The center reports these key findings from its study of cities and counties:

48% of surveyed cities have implemented moratoriums on accepting any marijuana related business licenses.

At least 1.5 million Washington residents will be impacted by local moratoriums or bans.

There are very few cities that Zoned or chose No Action in southern Washington.

You can see what we know about many individual cities and counties in the gallery above.

If the caption on a photo says zoning rules are in place, that means the city or county will not fight marijuana businesses but will seek to put them somewhere, the same as they do for other businesses. That said, some zoning rules can be so onerous as to effectively ban those businesses.

Some Washington lawmakers concerned about a possible pot-business freeze-out want to keep cities and towns from adopting marijuana-business bans, and they’re looking at a couple ways of doing it.

On Tuesday, 10 representatives in the House — nine Democrats and one Republican, Rep. Gary Condotta — introduced a bill in Olympia that seeks to essentially ban pot bans, by requiring cities and counties to cooperate with state regulators in allowing licensed recreational marijuana gardens, processing facilities and stores to open within their jurisdictions.

If they don’t, they could lose their share of disbursements from a state liquor-license account. The account sent $49.5 million to cities and counties statewide during the last fiscal year.

Another measure, this one sponsored by Condotta, would be the carrot to the other’s stick. It would entice cities to allow marijuana businesses by giving them a slice of the revenue generated by retail marijuana sales.

Previous version of this post from Dec. 12, 2013 (just because there’s good info down there!)

In a political battle reminiscent of the Peloponnesian War, elected officials in Pierce County have duked it out over zoning for marijuana businesses with long-term consequences yet to be known.

How has this business been accepted in your community?(Photo: Getty Images)

First, county council members approved rules saying that until the feds tell them it’s OK, they won’t allow marijuana businesses in unincorporated areas. Then the elected county executive, Pat McCarthy, vetoed that decision. As the News Tribune reported:

McCarthy said the council can’t stop the state from issuing licenses so it should focus on zoning where marijuana businesses should go.

“Yes, the state law is in conflict with federal law, but the U.S. Department of Justice in August announced it is not going to challenge the state law at this time,” said McCarthy, a Democrat. “The county is an entity of the state, and we cannot pass an ordinance that is in conflict with the state.”

But on Tuesday, the council overrode the veto and the ban is in place … at least until it gets sued. If it gets sued. Pierce County and other local bodies that effectively ban marijuana businesses outright, through delays or moratoriums that never end, will get away with it for awhile.

The Washington State Liquor Control Board says it won’t sue a city or county because it’s not harmed by the ban. The board is going to issue licenses, and if a business that gets one is in a jurisdiction that has an effective ban in place, that’s between the jurisdiction and the business.

UPDATE (12/15): The Associated Press conveyed this update on Sunday:

A Pierce County ordinance that would block licensed marijuana operations may be challenged in court. The News Tribune reports that supporters of legalized marijuana plan to battle the ordinance. Pierce County Prosecuting Attorney Mark Lindquist says the county plans to rely on the supremacy of federal law if it is sued.

The board isn’t totally abandoning businesses yet, though. It has hit up Washington Attorney General Bob Ferguson for an opinion as to whether cities and counties can ban these businesses. We’re not sure what will happen after that opinion comes out in the next month or so.

While the federal government’s prohibition of marijuana is a unique wrinkle, it’s pretty clear on the legal front that cities and counties can’t indefinitely ban businesses allowed by state law. For instance, in 2006, Seattle’s 17-year-old moratorium on new strip clubs got tossed by a judge, and city taxpayers had to cough up $500,000 to settle the suit brought by the business owner.

Where our info came from

We turned to the Municipal Research and Services Center of Washington for a list of cities and counties that have reported actions surrounding zoning for marijuana businesses. We’ll have to wait for our interns to return before calling every city and county in the state …

You can see what we know so far, however, in the gallery above. If the caption on a photo says zoning rules are in place, that means the city or county will not fight marijuana businesses but will seek to put them somewhere, the same as they do for other businesses. That said, some zoning rules can be so onerous as to effectively ban those businesses.

To know the details, you can check out the MRSC site, but the only way to know for sure is to contact your local government.

In a conversation with Jim Doherty, a legal consultant for MRSC, we learned that many places with moratoriums in place will eventually zone for marijuana businesses. They’re just trying to get their ducks in a row first.

Here’s what he said:

At the moment, we have a fair number of cities and counties that have moratoriums in place and what I expect is that some of them are just in the process of developing rules and want to give it more thought.

I think some of them are dragging their feet to see what happens with other jurisdictions. And, some of them still can’t believe that this is happening, and they are blinking and thinking that the federal government is going to ride in over the crest of the hill with all their cavalry and charge down and (put an end to this nonsense).

I tell people it’s not going to happen. The politics are not there for it.

I think that when some other places see that licenses are being issued and there aren’t … the sky isn’t going to fall. A lot of places anticipate all these secondary effects. Like the Redmond Ridge issue … this was a grow operation in a warehouse in an industrial park, I gather. It has concrete walls. It’s going to have surveillance cameras. It’s not like local kids are going to wander in there, and it’s not like there’s going to be all these people with hippie vans and long hair sitting around smoking bongs outside.

(These business) are trying to make it as a legitimate business and no one wants to lose their license. Until people actually see a store running and realize that it’s not more threatening than a liquor store, then I think maybe some of the foot dragging and some of the restrictions will lighten up.

And there you have it.

Where marijuana business seeking state licenses would be:

Image 1of/39

Caption

Close

Image 1 of 39

<p><b>Applications for Adams County:</b>
<p>Growers/producers: 15</p>
<p>Processors: 8 </p>
<p>Retail: 4 - 2 for the city of Lind. 1 in Othello. 1 for Ritzville. less

<p><b>Applications for Adams County:</b>
<p>Growers/producers: 15</p>
<p>Processors: 8 </p>
<p>Retail: 4 - 2 for the city of Lind. 1 in Othello. 1 for ... more

<p>Applications for Pacific:</p>
<p>Growers: 47</p>
<p>Processors: 34</p>
<p>Retailers: 21 - 3 in Ilwaco. 2 in Long Beach. 1 in Grayland. 1 in Seaview. 3 in Chinook. 1 in Nahcotta. Raymond is 6, and 4 in South Bend.</p> less

<p>Applications for Pacific:</p>
<p>Growers: 47</p>
<p>Processors: 34</p>
<p>Retailers: 21 - 3 in Ilwaco. 2 in Long Beach. 1 in Grayland. 1 in Seaview. 3 in Chinook. 1 in Nahcotta. Raymond is 6, and 4 in ... more

Image 25 of 39

<p>Applications for Pend Oreille:</p>
<p>Growers: 13</p>
<p>Processors: 7</p>
<p>Retailers: 3, one in USK and one in Newport</p>

<p>Applications for Pend Oreille:</p>
<p>Growers: 13</p>
<p>Processors: 7</p>
<p>Retailers: 3, one in USK and one in Newport</p>

Image 26 of 39

<p>Applications for Pierce:</p>
<p>Growers: 205</p>
<p>Processors: 157</p>
<p>Retailers: 221 - Auburn is 1, Bonney Lake is 3. 2 in Buckley. 1 in Edgewood. 2 in Fircrest. Puyallup is 26, Gig Harbor is 28, Tacoma is 111. 11 in Fife. 1 in Lake Tapps. 3 in Lakebay. 1 in Graham. 15 in Lakewood. 4 in University Place. 1 in Milton. 1 in Steilacoom. 1 in Orting. 1 in Parkland. 3 for Roy. 2 in Spanaway. 2 in Sumner.</p> less